Court rejects woman’s plea, says husband giving mother time and money is not domestic violence

A sessions court here dismissed a woman’s plea challenging a magistrate court order on a complaint by her husband and in-laws, holding that a man’s giving of time and money to his mother cannot be considered domestic violence.

Additional Sessions Judge (Dindoshi Court) Ashish Ayachit, in the order passed on Tuesday, also said that the charges against the accused were vague and there was no proof that they had committed domestic violence against the applicant (a woman).

The woman, who works as an assistant at the ‘Mantralaya’ (State Secretariat), filed a complaint before the Magistrate Court under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act seeking an order seeking protection, monetary relief and compensation.

She claims her husband cheated on her by suppressing her mother’s mental illness while marrying her.

The woman also claimed that her mother-in-law opposed her work and often harassed her, and that her husband and mother also quarreled with her. She said that from September 1993 to December 2004, her husband stayed abroad for work reasons.

Whenever he came to India for vacation, he would visit his mother and send her 10,000 rupees every year. He also paid for eye surgery for his mother, the woman said.

She also claimed to have been harassed by other members of her in-laws’ family. However, her in-laws denied all the accusations.

The man claimed she never accepted him as her husband and often made false accusations against him. According to him, he had filed for divorce in the family court due to her abusive behavior.

He also claimed that his wife withdrew Rs 21.68 lakh from his NRE (non-resident external) account without any information and used the money to buy a flat. During the woman’s plea, the trial court (magistrate) granted her interim maintenance of Rs 3,000 per month.

After recording the evidence of the woman and others, the district court dismissed her plea and set aside the interim directions and relief granted to her during the pendency of the proceedings.

The woman subsequently filed a criminal appeal in court. After reviewing the evidence, the court found that the charges against the defendants were “vague” and there was no evidence that they had committed domestic violence against the women.

“According to the record, the applicant is working as a salaried ‘assistant’ in Mantralaya. From the totality of the evidence, her grievance is that the defendant, her husband, contributed time and money to his mother, which cannot be considered for domestic violence,” the court said.

“On a careful reading of the entire evidence of the applicant and respondent No. 1 (husband), I am of the view that the applicant has failed to prove that he was subjected to domestic violence,” the judge said.

The court also held that the proceedings were initiated after the woman’s husband filed notice of divorce. The woman was not entitled to any relief under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, the statement said.

The court further said that the argument that the woman’s daughter was unmarried and therefore alimony could be awarded to the latter was unacceptable.

The judge said, “I do not think the applicant is entitled to claim alimony from the eldest daughter,” who has an independent remedy under the law. The bench added that the impugned judgment of the trial court did not require the intervention of this court.

(This story has not been edited by News18 staff and is published from associated news agency – PTI)